OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of teicoplanin treatment on complicated Gram-positive urinary tract infection.METHODS The patients′ clinical manifestation,laboratory results,bacterial culture changes after intravascular administration of teicoplanin were observed.Each patient was administered teicoplanin(200 mg once a day for 10-14 days,but 400 mg in the first day).RESULTS The effective rate and the bacterial eradication rate were 90.0% and 86.7%,respectively.All patients experienced relief from clinical infective symptoms and systemic reactions.There were no abnormal laboratory findings and adverse reactions.CONCLUSIONS Teicoplanin is an effective and safe antibiotic for the treatment of patients with complicated urinary tract infection.

BACKGROUNDTo observe and compare the efficacy and safety of IEP and EP regimens for small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

METHODSSixty-four patients with SCLC pathologically proved were randomly divided into IEP group ( n =32) and EP group ( n =32).

RESULTSAll the 64 patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. In IEP group, the total responsive rate, responsive rates of limited-stage patients and extensive-stage patients were 84.4%(27/32), 100.0%(15/15) and 70.6%(12/17) respectively; while in EP group, those were 75.0%(24/32), 85.7%(12/14) and 66.7% (12/18) respectively. The median duration of remission was 6 months and 1-year survival rate was 62.5% in IEP group, and 5 months and 56.2% in EP group. There was no significant difference in response rate, median duration of remission and 1-year survival between the two groups ( P > 0.05). The main toxicity was myelosuppression. Incidences of leukopenia at grade III-IV, nausea, vomiting and alopecia were significantly higher in the IEP arm than those in the EP arm ( P < 0.01 ).

CONCLUSIONSHigh response rates and tolerable toxicities are attainable for small cell lung cancer treated with IEP and EP. IEP regimen shows a similar response rate compared with EP regimen. They might be considered as relevant regimens in initial patients with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUNDChemotherapy is very important in treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and the third-generation cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens have been the standard treatment for advanced NSCLC. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and toxicity among four different chemotherapeutic regimens combined with radiotherapy in patients with stage III/IV NSCLC.

METHODSA total of 527 patients with stage III/IV NSCLC were enrolled, among whom there were 243 patients received cisplatin/vinorelbine (NP group), 163 patients for cisplatin/paclitaxel (TP group), 65 patients for cisplatin/gemcitabine (GP group) and 56 patients for cisplatin/docetaxel (DP group). The efficacy, side effects, median time to progression (TTP), median survival time (MST), 1- and 2-year survival rate were compared.

RESULTSThe response rate was 46.9% in the NP arm, 44.8% in the TP arm, 47.7% in the GP arm and 42.9% in the DP arm (P > 0.05). The response rate of patients with radiochemotherapy was 69.9%, and 40.8% for those with chemotherapy alone (P < 0.05). In group NP, TP, GP and DP, median TTP was 5.7, 5.3, 5.9 and 5.5 months (P > 0.05) respectively, MST was 10.4, 10.6, 11.5 and 10.4 months (P > 0.05) respectively, 1-year survival rate was 41.9%, 41.1%, 43.1% and 42.9% (P > 0.05) respectively, and 2-year survival rate was 21.3%, 19.4%, 23.1% and 23.2% (P > 0.05) respectively.

CONCLUSIONSThe third-generation cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens may be the standard treatment for advanced NSCLC, and their combination with radiotherapy may improve the therapeutic efficacy and prolong the survival of patients.